would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier group?

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

bd popeye said:

The US, if hostilities were deffintlently imminent, The US theater commander would have ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) deployed to disrupt the PLA defense system. The ECM emitted bu the US would be very disruptive to all PRC electronics. Military & Civillian. Very disruptive indeed.

Click to expand...

The PLA is well too aware of this and for years now. You cannot say the PLA have not anticipated and actively, deliberately prepared for this, and the PLA often mentions the deliberate use of heavy ECM interference with their exercises. That goes for all land, air and sea exercises as well. The preparedness the PLA puts in all this from top to bottom cannot be under emphasized.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

Lads, when you play these Taiwan-invasio wargames or any wargames for that matter, please learn the concepts and basic principles of the weaponsystems you want to use and try to use them in proper enchelon and role.

As we try to esthabilise an image of reasonable military discussion forum, juvenile fantasies where out-of-context weapon system performs magical miracle works doesen't quite fit to it. So please keep the discussion reasonable and in the boundaries of realism.

Thanks.
Gollevainen
Supermod

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

Well, JDSF has no true offensive weapons and PLA does not possess any weapon systems that can threaten the Japanese islands apart from its ballistic missiles, so attacks on each other will only be directed at each other's naval assets. Furthermore, I cannot forsee Japan and China attacking each other's territory in any cirucmstance. Even the USN will not attack Chinese territory unless the PLA does something to seriously escalate the situation.[/QUOTE]

I think any ballistic missiles is a threat to a fixed target. It's like throwing a bomb, whether it's accurate or not, it's still a threat. Attacking naval ships is harder because the targets are moving. It's easier to attack fixed targets, such as islands. Again, whether the missile will hit the target or not, it will hit something.

To me, ballistic missiles are still the cheapest and the most dangerous weapons of all.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

The USA is not stupid, they can use the terrain and high mountainside of the eastern coast of Taiwan as cover. Fighter planes such as the F-18 can fly all over the island and with more advanced weaponary than that of Taiwan or the PLA puts the US at an slight advantage. Don't forget destroyers can launch missile attacks and so can the submarines protecting the carriers. Only if Japan is attacked or has a great amount of pressure by the US and Taiwan to help they will attack China. Don't forget that Pacific Command is quite huge, and has alot of aircraft, carriers, destroyers and submarines at its disposal. I have no doubt the Chinese have a huge army too, but their military investment has only been great during the past decade or so, while the US have invested huge amounts of money to guarantee land, air, sea superiority if a war occurs.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

Ok. So I will take it that Japan might not join in the fray. However with the US military might, it is possible that US might launch an attack on the Chinese cities. The main reason is not to destroy or even occupied those area.
Remember we are looking at Taiwan's scenerio, and depending on whether US is truely wanting to defend Taiwan against the Chinese attack, an attack on the mainland will actually force the chinese forces out from their warpath and back to homeland to defend against the US.
I believe this is a better option then to throw in a lot of assets into Taiwan in the bid to defend her against China, but instead launch an attack and force the Chinese to retreat their force to defend their homeland. As was part of my country's policy which I quote here, "An Offensive is the best defence a nation would have."

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

China's development has been incremental. It starts with the core defense and goes outwards. People simply aren't as stupid as you think: they would have thought about having adequate defenses before goes outwards.

Chinese defenses are redundant, dense and resilient. Nobody is going to fight a land war against the PLA, for decades this has been proven. With the introduction of AWACS and WS-10A in the past few years, even an air assault is very difficult.

Interestingly, PLA's SAM seems be particularly opaque. We know it can make superior products compared to export-model Russian S-300 PMU's. But how much better? Is it comparable to S-400? Nobody knows.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

balance said:

Well, JDSF has no true offensive weapons and PLA does not possess any weapon systems that can threaten the Japanese islands apart from its ballistic missiles, so attacks on each other will only be directed at each other's naval assets. Furthermore, I cannot forsee Japan and China attacking each other's territory in any cirucmstance. Even the USN will not attack Chinese territory unless the PLA does something to seriously escalate the situation.

Click to expand...

Of course - an assault on either's territory would be extremely hard and of little real value. I think that the JASDF flying out of Okinawa might be involved alongside the MSDF. Whether and how Japan would get involved is another matter.

The US might attack Chinese territory in as far as Chinese bases, radar installations, etc. If it intervened on Taiwan's side not doing so would give China a significant advantage. It wouldn't lose anything from Tomohawk launches, and it might decide that air-to-ground attacks could be necessary.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

rhino123 said:

Ok. So I will take it that Japan might not join in the fray. However with the US military might, it is possible that US might launch an attack on the Chinese cities. The main reason is not to destroy or even occupied those area.
Remember we are looking at Taiwan's scenerio, and depending on whether US is truely wanting to defend Taiwan against the Chinese attack, an attack on the mainland will actually force the chinese forces out from their warpath and back to homeland to defend against the US.
I believe this is a better option then to throw in a lot of assets into Taiwan in the bid to defend her against China, but instead launch an attack and force the Chinese to retreat their force to defend their homeland. As was part of my country's policy which I quote here, "An Offensive is the best defence a nation would have."

Click to expand...

The problem by attacking Chinese cities is it becomes US vs China. And China will have the excuse to launch an attack on US assets. I don't think any sane US president or commander in chief will take such a risk. The UN will step in to broker a cease-fire, otherwise it will escalate into a bigger war. Remember the US even didn't do anything to protect Georgia militarily. They are afraid of escalating the conflict into US vs. Russia. The winner will bleed to death. What's the point?

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

Roger604 said:

China's development has been incremental. It starts with the core defense and goes outwards. People simply aren't as stupid as you think: they would have thought about having adequate defenses before goes outwards.

Chinese defenses are redundant, dense and resilient. Nobody is going to fight a land war against the PLA, for decades this has been proven. With the introduction of AWACS and WS-10A in the past few years, even an air assault is very difficult.

Interestingly, PLA's SAM seems be particularly opaque. We know it can make superior products compared to export-model Russian S-300 PMU's. But how much better? Is it comparable to S-400? Nobody knows.

Click to expand...

Look both sides arent stupid. If USA was pressured they would launch attacks against deep inland strategic targets, otherwise they would just strike coastal military installations. No matter how dense defences can be, part will be destroyed during a war. You cannot say they won't be touched by war. Once part of the defences are down, you can take out the rest more easily. When you talk about Air Superiority the USA has the upper hand, with more advanced fighters both technologically and numerically. The Chinese even though have new fighters, they are mostly Russian exports and reproductions. If China was to build more new fighters, they would have to wait for some Russian fighter parts and Russian approval to build more fighters.

Both sides have disadvantages and advantages, what will happen we will never know until it does happen.

Re: would MLRS and PGMs be a deterrent force in the taiwan strait against carrier gro

balance said:

The problem by attacking Chinese cities is it becomes US vs China. And China will have the excuse to launch an attack on US assets. I don't think any sane US president or commander in chief will take such a risk. The UN will step in to broker a cease-fire, otherwise it will escalate into a bigger war. Remember the US even didn't do anything to protect Georgia militarily. They are afraid of escalating the conflict into US vs. Russia. The winner will bleed to death. What's the point?

Click to expand...

The UN cant really broker a cease-fire because supposedly UNDER UN LAW TAIWAN IS PART OF CHINA (I'm only using this as a statement). Georgia is different, there are some similarities and differences. Georgia wasn't under law for the US to protect and aid them, while Taiwan has the US's Taiwan Relations Act. US will not attack cities but rather military installations. It would only attack cities if it was an invasion.